I disagree with giving this properly formatted movie page a prod merely because someone finds its banter unremarkable. I find repugnance of that logic all too remarkable — as it has been used in many ways to suppress and eliminate much that might have legitimate value or humor to others. I think the joke about the name quite humorous, and though I would probably have never created this page, I don't see any reason for it being removed, and though I am not really interested in gathering any more quotes for it, I am contending that this prod notice should be removed. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 16:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

While I disagree with the characterization that any who seek to ensure that only the highest quality pages appear here are merely doing so to satisfy some need to control others, I do agree that the page is probably worth keeping. I would agree that the prod tag should be removed (and will do so). Should the placer of this tag disagree, I am sure it will make its way to the VFD page, where its merits can be further discussed. ~ UDScott 17:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the prod. I would like to point out that In this case I am not saying this was so clear-cut a matter as wanting to control other people specifically, as it was to maintaining unwarranted control of the situations — which in of itself can often be dangerous to vital human interests. All of my behavior here, and in my life, is as devoted as it can possibly be to liberty and justice, irrespective of my personal opinions about some of the issues I might contend about in regard to them. I continually recognize the proper need and desire for vital influence but am continually contending against that which I contend to be a morbid and mortifying influence of overly controlling rules, statutes, and customs. I sometimes will express emotional involvement, but it generally will spring from my deep commitment to liberty, rather than my concerns about the outcomes in regard to any specific debates about how it might best be applied. I can respect many people's views — but where contentions arise those values which I perceive to be most vitally important are the ones I will seek to promote among ALL parties. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 17:41, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It is a Good Thing™ for editors to review proposed deletions, but it is unnecessary to impugn the motivation or character of those who propose them. I take umbrage at being accused of morbidity: I make no apology for practicing both the additive and subtractive processes that together constitute editing. Far from being some sort of control freak, I think history shows me to be deferential to the sensibilities of the community while attempting to influence the level of quality at Wikiquote.

The memorability of humor is easily overrated, being much influenced by first impressions, but I recognize that it can be a slippery judgment call. I used a {{prod}} because I thought this case was fairly clear cut, and I still do not see how it furthers our supporting foundation's educational mission, but I could certainly be mistaken: perhaps we can look forward to finding this witticism in the next edition of Bartlett's Familiar Quotations. Or perhaps someone will second the nomination by taking it to a vote. ~ Ningauble 20:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)